Welcome Marama Davidson

21 comments on “Welcome Marama Davidson ”

• Comments are now closed

1. One Anonymous Bloke 1

   3 November 2015 at 3:32 pm

   When I heard Russel Norman was resigning I thought “that sucks”.

   When I heard he was to be replaced by Marama Davidson I thought “Yay!”

   Yay!
   • RedLogix 1.1

     3 November 2015 at 4:02 pm

     Agreed OAB. She’ll be another Green MP in the mold of Sue Bradford and Nandor Tanczos – there to achieve something well beyond a mere political career.
   • weka 1.2

     3 November 2015 at 4:04 pm

     That was pretty much my response too, yay! I’m excited to see what Davidson’s strong voice will do in parliament.
2. tracey 2

   3 November 2015 at 4:07 pm

   As has been the case hisotircally with the Green Party, one quality and effective member leaves, a new person of quality and effectiveness steps up.

   Too often people have proclaimed, prematurely, the demise of the Green Party because a particular person steps aside.

   The Green Party has also focussed on succession planning, it is embedded in its philosophy. There are parties on the current political spectrum that might do well to observe that strategy. I would also say the same for many of our businesses in NZ. Too often our leaders, from many walks of life, think if the organisation can’t survive without them it speaks volumes about their leadership. It does, but not in a positive way.

   For those who keep wondering why the Greens aren’t an “at all costs we want power” party, have a read of the following link to understand how a party can influence and impact NZ and NZers without direct reigns of power.

   https://home.greens.org.nz/history-green-party

   Labour frustrates me but I absolutely understand and respect the need for a strong Labour Party working with the Green Party to achieve the kind of NZ I want for those who come after me. Contrary to what some here seem to think, that doesn’t mean I want to see the Labour Party crushed. BUT nor do I want to see a Labour party that thinks it can only get into Party if it keeps being a variation of the Government that preceded it. That is a failed experiement. For evidence I ask you to look from 1984 to date.
3. Robert Atack 3

   3 November 2015 at 6:17 pm

   OMG six tamariki.
   • Robert Atack 3.1

     4 November 2015 at 1:30 pm

     Maybe the only way a person could create more damage to the environment than say ‘producing’ a potential 420 year human foot print (6 X 70) would be to drill an oil well in their backyard.
     It is kind of an oxymoron having someone in the so called environmental party who is responsible for so much environmental damage, and alas as the 6 will not survive the near term extinction of humans, a bloody lot of unnecessary suffering as well.

     Basically if you loved children you wouldn’t have them.
     • Lara 3.1.1

       4 November 2015 at 10:03 pm

       She’s making up for the many of us who have none or only one.

       You do realise that the birth rate in NZ is now just below replacement rate?

       And you do understand the concept of averages, right?
       • weka 3.1.1.1

         4 November 2015 at 10:18 pm

         Don’t worry, Robert is a hypocrite par excellence when it comes to CC. He doesn’t believe that anyone can do anything useful about CC, so he doesn’t worr about his own footprint. His main beef in the past about childbearing isn’t the footprint issue (it’s too late to worry about that) but that people are cruel to bring another being into the world. Which is kind of weird that he’s now talking about footprints.
         • Robert Atack 3.1.1.1.1

           5 November 2015 at 9:01 pm

           I guess I have a right of reply ?
           My ‘footprint’ comment is directed at the person who has expanded hers exponentially, if the children survived what is coming that is (fat chance) .
           I’m trying to point out that a person who has done this much potential damage to the human friendly environment – HFE, is the hypocrite when they then put their hands up as being concerned about the HFE, what can someone who has produced this many children say to couples considering parenthood now? Sorry, forgot you think there is hundreds of years of life left in the HFE, and 7 billion isn’t enough humans.
           The planet passed peak per capita energy back in 1986 ish, and peak crude oil in 2006 ish. Our diet needs something like 9 fossil fuel ‘calories’ to every 1 sun calorie to maintain this present population, How do you propose feeding all these children for the next 70 years? Are you pro fracking?
           ‘We’ will need to produce as much food in the next 50 years as humans have done for the past 10,000 years.
           400 ppm CO2 and 200 CO2e (CH4) = the same as it did last time, what do you not understand about that?
           The time lag that the ice and deep oceans have given us is fast running out. When the HFE catches up with 600 ppm CO2e, – (well and truly within the life times of anyone born in the past 40-60 years), the planet is going to see +6C.
           We are in the 6th great extinction, with up to 200 species a day going extinct now, several of those species may have been the lynch pin of our survival ? Or they will be, IE the pollinators – bees etc !
           Was it Einstein who said we had 3 years after the bees went?
           China with its 1.2 (?) billion people is predicted to run out of potable water within 10 years ….. they could own most of NZ by then.
           We could aim at reducing CO2 emissions down to zero, but the methane catherate gun has gone off, no matter how much we reduce CO2 emissions, the methane is unstoppable … so is the carbon … for time frames that matter. The forest fires, droughts, and permafrost melt will start to make our emissions look small soon. The soot and gasses coming from the forest fires is adding heat, and CO2 CH4 etc, and darkening Greenland, and other what were reflective areas.
           Not to mention the growth based savings scam the Greens promote, in an economy based on pixels for money and the BS – BAU growth based mantra.
           When I was 42 in 1999 I started reading the essays on http://www.dieoff.org after about 3 months reading, it dawned on me that if I had a child then, by the time it got to my age it would be looking at a bloody bleak future, being 2042, the 2042 I pictured back then is the world today, the whole thing has sped up massively in the past 15 years, or maybe my awareness has ?
           And we have the Greens promoting electric cars now ??
           If you are standing up to promote save the environment BS it is a bit late with 6 children.
           If we were all converted to a weka clone at midnight we will still be going extinct due to over population (yes! even to many wekas!!) 600 ppm CO2e and rising, and peak everything humans need to survive.
           Even just having one child is buying yourself a shit load of sadness, would you have the child if it was guaranteed to drop dead from cancer @ 10? if you knew would you go ahead and conceive? (not trying to upset people who have been through this stuff)
           I’m not pro abortion, I would rather people just got sterilized, were gay, bonked willing bovines, feed chickens, anything but have kids 😉
           Never mind, it needs to get a lot bleaker before you are over your denial.
           Sadly there could be between 500 million, and a billion more children born before the end.
       • Robert Atack 3.1.1.2

         6 November 2015 at 7:38 am

         Lara https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vII-GxsrR2c watch and learn
4. Tiger Mountain 4

   3 November 2015 at 7:31 pm

   all the best Marama, this woman has done a lot more than many MPs ever will! before even getting to parliament
   • Roger Ramjet 4.1

     3 November 2015 at 9:12 pm

     Do you mean sit around in a cushy 9-5 civil service job writing 50 page meaningless reports for 10 years?
     • Tracey 4.1.1

       4 November 2015 at 10:09 am

       The Stuart Nash thread is over there…
       • weka 4.1.1.1

         4 November 2015 at 10:18 pm

         lolnui!
         • Tracey 4.1.1.1.1

           5 November 2015 at 5:18 pm

           I could have said former career bureaucrat bill english 😆
5. Roy 5

   3 November 2015 at 8:53 pm

   We’ll remember this day when we sit around the campfire, listening to her making her Prime Minister’s address. Imagine that!
   • weka 5.1

     3 November 2015 at 9:07 pm

     !
   • dukeofurl 5.2

     4 November 2015 at 6:56 am

     Camp fires were banned because of CO2 reduction regulations 2025. Anyway they are carcinogenic

     [Until you apologise for your blatent ageism and ad hominem attacks from the other day, say away. I flagged you on a number of your comments. OSomething, it seems, you’ve chosen to ignore. You were in moderation. You are now banned.] – Bill
     • You_Fool 5.2.1

       4 November 2015 at 8:21 am

       Solar powered imitation camp fire then
     • roy cartland 5.2.2

       4 November 2015 at 8:28 am

       Ooo, and the PM title has finally been scrapped for something a bit more ‘us’:
   • Robert Atack 5.3

     4 November 2015 at 1:38 pm

     Being as cannibalism is a way more likely future for us, we may well be sitting around the camp fire eating her )

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS